Posts Tagged ‘Treason’

This is that brief, glorious moment in history
when everyone stands around…reloading.

Now, Which 46 Senators Voted to Destroy Us? Well, let their names become known !! See below

In a 53-46 vote, the Senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The Statement of Purpose from the Bill reads: “To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.” The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry, now get this, on all private guns and ammo.Astonishingly, 46 out of our 100 United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N.Baldwin (D-WI)Baucus (D-MT)Bennett (D-CO)Blumenthal (D-CT)Boxer (D-CA)Brown (D-OH)Cantwell (D-WA)Cardin (D-MD)Carper (D-DE)Casey (D-PA)Coons (D-DE)Cowan (D-MA)Durbin (D-IL)jFeinstein (D-CA)Franken (D-MN)Gillibrand (D-NY)Harkin (D-IA)Hirono (D-HI)Johnson (D-SD)Kaine (D-VA)King (I-ME)Klobuchar (D-MN)Landrieu (D-LA)Leahy (D-VT)Levin (D-MI)McCaskill (D-MO)Menendez (D-NJ)Merkley (D-OR)Mikulski (D-MD)Murphy (D-CT)Murray (D-WA)Nelson (D-FL)Reed (D-RI)Reid (D-NV)Rockefeller (D-WV)Sanders (I-VT)Schatz (D-HI)Schumer (D-NY)Shaheen (D-NH)Stabenow (D-MI)Udall (D-CO)Udall (D-NM)Warner (D-VA)Warren (D-MA)Whitehouse (D-RI)Wyden (D-OR)Folks: This needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take OUR guns. They need to lose their next election. We have been betrayed.46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.Please send this to SOMEONE!Hat Tip to TEXASFRED

“We are going to finish the job and pass background checks and then move on and do other things we have to do to get guns off the streets and stop gun violence.” — Senator Chuck Schumer, November 13, 2013

Don’t let them get away with it.

Democrats on Capitol Hill want to change the subject, but we can’t let them do it.

The anti-gun aspects of ObamaCare haven’t even been fully implemented yet because the entire “health care” rollout has been imploding — and it’s taking a huge toll on the President.

The solution?

The Examiner.com reported last week that Democrats are trying to “deflect public attention from a disaster of their own making [on ObamaCare] by shifting the subject to gun control.”

They’re hoping to pressure Republicans on the 20-year anniversary of the Brady Law. (November 30 marks the anniversary when President Clinton signed the bill into law.)

The Hill reports, “Democrats argue that enough pressure on House GOP leaders would return the topic [of gun control] to prominence.”

You can’t blame them. As support for ObamaCare continues to plummet — and the President’s approval rating along with it — many Democrats are scrambling to get the mainstream media to cover any other topic.

Their first choice is to return to their tired ole gun control agenda like the Toomey-Manchin background checks (for private gun buyers) in the Senate or the identical Thompson-King bill (HR 1565) in the House. These are unconstitutional and should never see the light of day.

Their second plan to distract the American public is to blow up the Senate rules — abolishing the filibuster where federal judges are concerned — so that Democrats can pack the courts with liberal, anti-gunners who will uphold ObamaCare. Majority Leader Harry Reid successfully accomplished this yesterday, claiming it was necessary because Republicans were supposedly causing gridlock.

Finally, Democrats plan to craft small temporary one-year “fixes” for the health care law in order to fool enough Americans into reelecting senators who were the “deciding votes” on ObamaCare:

* Mary Landrieu, the Louisiana Democrat — who sold her soul to vote for ObamaCare in exchange for a political bribe nicknamed “the Louisiana purchase” — is currently up in a tough reelection. She knew how bad ObamaCare was, but she didn’t care until the nation’s pain threatened her reelection.

* Mark Begich, the Alaska Democrat who also cast the deciding vote, also knew Alaskans would suffer. But it didn’t bother him until their suffering threatened his reelection.

* Similarly, several other Democrat Senators — Kay Hagan (NC), Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Mark Warner (VA), Mark Udall (CO), Mark Pryor (AR) and Jeff Merkley (OR) — all became “born again skeptics” of ObamaCare when provisions they crafted, knew about, and were indispensable in passing came back to bite them.

All of these senators had a chance to “tweak” ObamaCare during the shutdown fight. Instead, these Senators were all too busy playing politics — gleeful at the prospect of declaring total victory over Republicans.

We need to remind them that the only legitimate option is a total repeal of the anti-gun ObamaCare law. And that a Brady Law anniversary is an excuse to pass more gun control, but rather, a reminder of just how much of our constitutional rights have already been infringed.

ACTION: Contact your Representative and Senators and urge them to ignore calls for gun control or to settle for a temporary one year ObamaCare “fix.” Demand that they repeal this anti-gun travesty and stop trying to change the subject to supporting gun control.

“[GOA’s Larry] Pratt also contends that the U.N. has a terrible track record in protecting human life. He said the horrors in Rwanda are a perfect example of why the U.N. has no business deciding who should and should not have access to guns.” — WorldNetDaily, June 2013

When you’re dealing with an adversary who hates the 2nd Amendment as much as Barack Obama, you have to fight attacks coming from several different directions.

We know we’ve thrown a lot at you lately. But there’s one other issue we’d like to bring to your attention.

As you know, the Obama administration recently signed the virulently anti-gun UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

Although purporting to regulate international trade in arms, the treaty empowers anti-gun administrations (such as Barack Obama’s) to institute internal gun control, including gun bans, gun registration, and more. In fact, the drafters of the treaty made no secret of their goal of imposing measures such as microstamping on countries like the United States.

Plus, it is entirely possible that, under the Supreme Court cases of Missouri v. Holland and Reid v. Covert, Obama could implement these restrictions without further legislation. After all, we’ve already seen the President do an end-around Congress by issuing over 20 executive actions this year.

Gun owners will rightfully counter that the UN — or the Congress or President for that matter — has NO AUTHORITY to impose any of these gun restrictions upon us. And those gun owners would be absolutely correct!

But if the President begins illegally implementing the UN treaty “by executive fiat” — just as he has done through other executive actions — then good people will go to jail for resisting these efforts and will have to defend their rights in court for simply exercising rights that were given to them by God.

This is why we have to raise a holy fuss right now, and thankfully, there are efforts underway in the Senate to do just that.

Earlier this year, with our support, an amendment offered by Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) to defund the ATT passed the Senate by a vote of 53-46. But that vote never became law.

The Moran letter raises six problems with the treaty that should be alarming, even to Senators who are not strongly pro-gun. These include the fact that the ATT was slammed through without consensus … it’s ambiguous … and it can be amended (and made even more restrictive) by the other nations which are parties to the treaty.

“According to conservative staffers [on Capitol Hill], Gun Owners of America was the most active outside group in early efforts to block all gun control efforts including Toomey-Manchin.” — The Examiner, April 28, 2013

Your GOA has been on the front lines, fighting for your rights.

While the news media has been focusing on several Obama Administration scandals in recent weeks — and rightfully so — don’t for a minute think that efforts to pass gun control in the Senate have died down.

They haven’t. The truth is that Representatives Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) are still at work — still trying to pull Senators over to their anti-gun side.

Sen. Toomey told the Philadelphia Inquirer recently that he is looking “to bring some more folks on board” — and that if successful, “then of course it would be worth bringing [gun control] up again.”

Both he and Manchin are still at it, trying to twist arms and coerce people over to his side.

Congress is just finishing up its Memorial Day break, so you are encouraged to resume contacting them now that they will soon be getting back to work. Let them know your approval (or disapproval) of their recent votes in the U.S. Senate.

To this end, GOA has just updated its website to give you the ammunition you need to hold your Senators accountable:

NOTE: In regard to the Senate voting records, you can click on the title of each vote to read an explanation of each vote. And regarding the grades that are posted, you will note that the following Senators saw their grades drop as a result of their recent votes IN FAVOR of gun control:

Urgent action required. It is urgent that every gun owner call their Senators today and demand that they oppose the “See a Shrink, Lose your Guns” sell-out bill that is being authored by Senators Pat Toomey (R) and Joe Manchin (D) – but which also has Chuck Schumer’s fingerprints all over it. Call immediately at 202-224-3121.

See a Shrink, Lose your Guns. The anti-gun “ranters” have spent the last week telling us that Republican Senators can’t filibuster Harry Reid’s gun control bill; that they can’t cut off debate to a bill they haven’t seen yet. “Let the bill come up,” they say. “We need to see the bill” before Senators can vote against cloture to proceed to it.

Well, we’ve seen the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, and it’s worse than the Feinstein gun ban, which will reportedly be tied to it and offered simultaneously in a Senate procedure known as an “amendment tree.”

Toomey and Manchin will claim that their bill only covers “gun show sales” and Internet sales. But if you’ve ever talked about your gun and /or let it be known you’d like to sell or buy a gun on the Internet, this language covers you. If you advertise your gun in the church bulletin and the bulletin is put on the Internet, you’re covered.

The only exemption is for sales that are sold exclusively by word of mouth. The increased number of background checks would likely exacerbate the system breakdowns (inherent to NICS) which have shut down gun shows over and over again. It would mean that Americans who were illegally denied firearms because their names were similar to other people’s would effectively be barred from owning a gun. (We would never tolerate such delays for voting rights or other freedoms that we are guaranteed.)

And for those Republicans who think they’re going to be able to offer their useless amendments, guess what? Reid is reportedly going to use a procedure to block out all amendments (called an “amendment tree”). And there are plenty of Senators standing in line to make sure that the Senate doesn’t give “unanimous consent” to let those Republicans offer their amendments.

So if you live in a rural area, you’re effectively barred from selling or buying a gun – or it at least becomes very, very difficult.

Incidentally, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer “national registry” language is full of holes. There will be a national gun registry as a result of this sell-out.

But that’s not the worst part. Under an amendment in the bill to HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), you could have your guns taken away because your private shrink thinks you’re “dangerous” and could send your name directly to the FBI Instant Check system.

Did you think it was terrible that 150,000 military veterans had been added into the NICS system because they’d seen a VA shrink about their PTSD? Well guess what? Now it’s going to happen to the rest of the population … by the millions!

And the next step, of course, will be to begin to sue psychiatrists that don’t send every single patient’s name to the Instant Check system, and to make sure that their lives are ruined if they don’t send a patient to NICS and anything goes wrong.

The bottom line: “See a shrink; lose your guns.”

All of this will reportedly be on an amendment tree with the Feinstein gun ban and magazine bans.

Repeal of gun owner protections. In addition, Toomey no doubt unintentionally agreed to repeal one of the most important protections for gun owners that was included in the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act – the provision that would allow you to take an unloaded, locked-up gun through states like New York without being stopped. Under a new subsection (c), the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer bill would require you to “demonstrate” to the satisfaction of New York police where you were coming from and where you are going to. And, if you don’t do that to their satisfaction, they can arrest you.

Please keep in mind, nothing in this bill would have stopped Newtown dirtbag from killing his mother and taking the firearms that she owned and perpetrating the horrible crimes that he committed.

Nothing is this bill would actually make children safer at schools. There is nothing that will actually keep bad guys from stealing or illegally acquiring guns, but there’s plenty that will threaten our gun rights!

What follows is a list. One that simply should not exist. It is one of the few exceptions that makes abortion on demand, as well as tar and feathering an American tradition that should be revitalized and applied most judiciously.

Some would call their support of the dismantling of The Bill of Rights treason. Count me among those that would. For the nitpickers, I use the common definition of the word treason, not the wimp model followed by lawyers and such…

President Obama outlined several major legislative initiatives that he claims will reduce gun-related violence, but representatives at Gun Owners of America say the proposals will assault Americans’ right to keep and bear arms and do nothing to prevent senseless killings.

The Obama legislative agenda includes several controversial items, starting with universal background checks to make sure guns are not purchased by felons or “someone legally prohibited from buying” a firearm.

Mike Hammond has served in the offices of three U.S. senators and is now general counsel at Gun Owners of America. He said this provision should be opposed on two grounds. His first concern centers around the people Obama thinks should be prohibited from buying guns.

“In about 150,000 cases, we’re talking about veterans who came back from Baghdad or Kabul, perhaps sought counseling for a traumatic experience and, as a result, the Veteran’s Administration appointed a fiduciary to supervise their financial affairs and then sent their names to this secret list in West Virginia that prohibits people from owning guns,” Hammond said. “These people didn’t do anything wrong. They served their country honorably, and there’s no reason they should lose their constitutional rights because they sought someone to counsel them.”

While Hammond fears law-abiding Americans could easily be blocked from exercising their Second Amendment rights, he also claims involving the government in each firearm transaction sets the stage for more heavy-handed actions from Uncle Sam.

“It’s increasingly clear to us that the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms are using these secret lists to begin to compile the beginnings of a national gun registry,” Hammond said. “I personally drafted the Smith Amendment, which would prohibit them from using the Brady Check in order to create a national gun registry. But when senators have recently asked the FBI, ‘How are you complying with the Smith Amendment and how long are you keeping the names?’ they’re told to go take a long walk off a short pier. There is a danger that the Obama administration wants to create this gun registry using this universal check. There is no way in heaven’s name that we are going to consider anything like that.”

Hammond said a national gun registry is a slippery slope to government confiscation of weapons once the government knows where they are. He uses recent events in New York state as an example, since Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed new gun-control legislation and then alluded to confiscating firearms that are now deemed illegal.

In pushing for the background check, Obama contended that 40 percent of gun sales have no background checks. Hammond said that statistic is pure fiction.

“They asked the FBI about that and basically the FBI said that the gun-control advocates, for lack of a better term, just pulled that statistic out of their ear,” he said. “I mean they just made that statistic up.”

The biggest congressional fight will likely center around Obama’s call for a ban on assault weapons and his demand that magazines carry a limit of 10 bullets. The president said weapons used in a theater of war should not be brought into a movie theater.

“That is a lie. When I was in the military, I had a weapon that was designed for the theater of war. It was called an M-16 rifle,” Hammond said. “It was a fully automatic rifle. Unless you get a special license from the FBI, you can’t own one of those guns in America. That is an absolute lie.”

“What the AR-15 is is a gun that is designed cosmetically to look like a full automatic but operates nothing like it,” he said.

Hammond also rejects the proposed limit on bullets in a magazine, saying shooters like the ones in Connecticut and Colorado could just as easily have brought multiple guns and multiple magazines and achieved the same horrific response.

Looking at the big picture of the debate, Hammond believes that Obama reached too far in this agenda.

“Obama, in this case, has dramatically overshot. I think he has overshot in a way that is going to destroy his entire gun-control package,” argued Hammond, who said Obama initially leaned toward restoring the ban on semi-automatic weapons that was in effect between 1994-2004. He said that ban didn’t address some of the more recent cosmetic features on guns, like the one used in the Sandy Hook massacre, so the scope of this legislation got much bigger.

“So he began adding more guns and more guns and more guns,” Hammond said. “The people who know what guns are out there tell us that the resulting legislation now will ban probably about 50 percent of the long guns currently in circulation and about 80 percent of the handguns in current circulation. Let me state that again. Barack Obama and his proposals would ban most guns currently in circulation.”

Hammond also rejected the president’s 23 executive actions, particularly the ones that encourage doctors to ask patients about guns and share that information with the government.

*** RAMMING into law the new Feinstein Gun Ban, and banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

Far more draconian than the earlier ban, the new Feinstein Gun Ban and the Magazine Ban demonizes guns for looking “scary” and targets rifles, shotguns and even handguns.

These new bans are NOT likely to include grandfather clauses, and they might even go for out-right confiscation.

*** FORCING through Congress a new national gun registration scheme under the guise of “background checks.”

There’s simply no way to enforce a ban on private transfers without government bureaucrats knowing exactly who owns what weapons.

*** A new “mental health” denial system using “ObamaCare’s” nationalized healthcare system to begin snooping on gun owners.

One Surgeon General estimated 46.4% of Americans will have mental health issues at some point in their lives!

So make no mistake, this is designed EXPLICITLY to allow the federal government to strip ANY law-abiding citizen they want — including military veterans — of their Second Amendment rights on a whim.

In fact, the so-called “mental health” and the “background check” national gun registration system may be where this fight is headed . . .

More than even an outright ban on certain types of firearms, nothing gets anti-gun activists like Sarah Brady more excited than the ability to demonize certain gun features and register and trace guns and gun owners.

“Our Founders intended the Senate to be a body where legislation was slowed down and subject to improvement through extended debate and amendment. [Harry] Reid’s proposed ‘reforms’ would remove two of the most fundamental rights traditionally reserved to all Senators — to freely debate and amend legislation. I shall not stand for that.” — Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

On Election Day last November, several Democrat Senators were campaigning for reelection in pro-gun states. And in order to get their constituents’ votes, they promised fealty to the Second Amendment.

Patrick, on November 6, Democrat Senators Joe Manchin (WV), Bob Casey (PA) and Jon Tester (MT) all won their respective elections. These seats, among others, were crucial to helping Harry Reid return to the top post in the Senate.

But only a month after the election returns were tallied, the Senate — under Majority Leader Harry Reid’s control — is now crusading to implement:

* Gun bans on semiautomatic firearms and magazines;

* An effective ban on gun shows;

* A ban on private gun sales, without going through a gun dealer; and,

* Changes in the Senate rules which would allow them to ban guns with a mere 50 Senate votes.

This last proposal is particularly insidious. Gun grabbers are not going to be able to get 60 votes to break a Senate filibuster of gun control. But, with the help of fake “pro-gun” Senate Democrats, they may be able to get 50.

So the question of whether Senate Democrats will need 50 votes or 60 votes will determine whether gun control -– and much of Obama’s agenda -– will be slammed through and passed into law.

This brings us to the “nuclear option.”

This is a trick which anti-gun Democrats intend to use the first day of the Senate session in order to obliterate the Senate rules and clear the way for 50-vote passage of gun control.

Your senator’s vote on the “nuclear option” may be the most important gun-related vote he casts during the 113th Congress. It may be the difference between whether Obama can secure Senate passage of gun bans, magazine bans, gun show bans, and bans on private gun sales.

Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the Senate is just following its precedents.

But that’s a bald-faced lie. As Democrats made clear during the Bush administration when the Republicans were contemplating the “nuclear option,” the nuclear option has been threatened, but the trigger has never been pulled.

Anti-gun Democrats will try to tell you that the “nuclear option” can only be invoked on the first day.

That’s a lie. Senate Rule 5, Paragraph 2, provides that the Senate rules continue from one Congress to the next, unless changed by 67 votes (needed to break a filibuster of rules changes). If the Senate can use brute force to obliterate Rule 5 by 50 votes, it can use brute force to obliterate any rule at any time by 50 votes.

This is a major vote that will have huge ramifications for our republic. Our gun rights are just one of the many freedoms that are on the chopping block right now. And if Harry Reid can squelch his opposition by nuking the filibuster, it will be the first step towards completely obliterating our Constitution.

ACTION: Click here to contact your Senators and tell them that the vote on the “nuclear option” will be the most important gun control vote of the 113th Congress. Urge them to vote AGAINST changing the Senate rules. Tell them to vote AGAINST the “nuclear option.”

You may also phone the United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request.

I received this in an email and thought it too good to just *forward*, so I am making it a post, that way it’s on the ‘net, my name is forever attached to it and the Obama regime knows it was ME that blasted them once again!

I have never heard this said as simply or as well; Class warfare at its best.

The folks who are getting the free stuff don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff, because the folks who are paying for the free stuff can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff. And, the folks who are paying for the free stuff want the free stuff to stop.

And the folks who are getting the free stuff want even more free stuff on top of the free stuff they are already getting!

Now … the people who are forcing the people who pay for the free stuff have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff that the people who are PAYING for the free stuff are being mean, prejudiced, and racist. So … the people who are GETTING the free stuff have been convinced they need to hate the people who are paying for the free stuff by the people who are forcing some people to pay for their free stuff and giving them the free stuff in the first place.

We have let the free stuff giving go on for so long that there are now more people getting free stuff than paying for the free stuff.

Now understand this; all great democracies have committed financial suicide somewhere between 200 and 250 years after being founded. The reason being; the voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury in exchange for electing them.

The United States officially became a Republic in 1776, 236 years ago. The number of people now getting free stuff outnumbers the people paying for the free stuff. We have one chance to change that in 2012. Failure to change that spells the end of the United States as we know it.